3 ms·

The "elected representatives by the citizens of Los Angeles" (Government) are accessing GPS Data about a companies property in its jurisdiction because the comp

The "elected representatives by the citizens of Los Angeles" (Government) are accessing GPS Data about a companies property in its jurisdiction because the companies are not regulating their own behavior and property. This is where citizens need to advocate in their own neighborhoods and get involved and vote if that is what they want.

dwild 7y ago
Thus you are agreeing that the government should get access to every phone calls, because some people may use it for illegal purpose and phone company doesn't regulate their behavior? If you have an issue with how theses companies operate, stop theses ways of operating, that's all. The solution isn't to deanonymize the userbase.
- supercanuck 7y ago
  Uber is a corporation and the property is the corporations. The data is the corporations too, and not the property of the individual. Users relinquished that control in your TOS. What the user wants has no bearing in this whatsoever. Uber is simply using you as a tool to get around the laws in the regions it operates in. How would you feel that instead of demanding the data , they simply purchased it?
  - dwild 7y ago
    > Uber is a corporation and the property is the corporations. The data is the corporations too, and not the property of the individual. I'm not arguing who is owning that data, I'm arguing about what happens to that data and whether that's right or wrong. The fact that it's legal or not doesn't change anything. Would you be fine with a genocide if the ones comitting them made sure it was ratified as a law first? > Uber is simply using you as a tool to get around the laws in the regions it operates in. If they didn't use that reason and simply shared it, I would still be arguing the same point... > How would you feel that instead of demanding the data , they simply purchased it? It would be just as bad.

dwild 7y ago

Thus you are agreeing that the government should get access to every phone calls, because some people may use it for illegal purpose and phone company doesn't regulate their behavior? If you have an issue with how theses companies operate, stop theses ways of operating, that's all. The solution isn't to deanonymize the userbase.

supercanuck 7y ago
Uber is a corporation and the property is the corporations. The data is the corporations too, and not the property of the individual. Users relinquished that control in your TOS. What the user wants has no bearing in this whatsoever. Uber is simply using you as a tool to get around the laws in the regions it operates in. How would you feel that instead of demanding the data , they simply purchased it?
- dwild 7y ago
  > Uber is a corporation and the property is the corporations. The data is the corporations too, and not the property of the individual. I'm not arguing who is owning that data, I'm arguing about what happens to that data and whether that's right or wrong. The fact that it's legal or not doesn't change anything. Would you be fine with a genocide if the ones comitting them made sure it was ratified as a law first? > Uber is simply using you as a tool to get around the laws in the regions it operates in. If they didn't use that reason and simply shared it, I would still be arguing the same point... > How would you feel that instead of demanding the data , they simply purchased it? It would be just as bad.